I wouldn't worry about Kelly's contract, UCLA is now flushed with Big Ten cash, hence they can afford to jettison this loser as soon as they can. New Chancellor will also help as Block was totally clueless about revenue making Athletics. I'd get rid of Kelly as soon as they are able and go for a no-name, that will be a better fit for thi…
I wouldn't worry about Kelly's contract, UCLA is now flushed with Big Ten cash, hence they can afford to jettison this loser as soon as they can. New Chancellor will also help as Block was totally clueless about revenue making Athletics. I'd get rid of Kelly as soon as they are able and go for a no-name, that will be a better fit for this type of program, then you'd probably see better recruiting and more winning. Of course, Kelly won't mind, he will then be on four payrolls (Oregon, Philadelphia, San Francisco, UCLA) before suckering another school or media outlet to hire him.
It's been interesting - and impressive - to see what Lance Leipold has going at Kansas. In the recent past Kansas-to-UCLA would have been a jump of about six levels of competition...but Leipold is actually building a program, as he's done at each of his past stops, and Kelly is just treading water. This is simply a thought exercise, as I've never truly contemplated the change so far, but I'm with you on the concept of not shooting for a big name for our next coach. Washington has done pretty well with the Fresno State coach that beat #13 UCLA a couple of years ago.
UCLA won't be "flushed (sic) with Big Ten cash" until we actually join the Big Ten and that doesn't happen until August 1, 2024.
I will have to obtain his contract to see what the exact date the buyout drops will be, but if it's December 1, then firing Kelly before then would make no sense at all. It would be just throwing about $4M away.
Wonder how much they've thrown away on this "program" since Kelly was hired? My guess is way more than $4m. You are suggesting giving him another full season (possibly into 2024), I wouldn't give him another full game!
I wouldn't worry about Kelly's contract, UCLA is now flushed with Big Ten cash, hence they can afford to jettison this loser as soon as they can. New Chancellor will also help as Block was totally clueless about revenue making Athletics. I'd get rid of Kelly as soon as they are able and go for a no-name, that will be a better fit for this type of program, then you'd probably see better recruiting and more winning. Of course, Kelly won't mind, he will then be on four payrolls (Oregon, Philadelphia, San Francisco, UCLA) before suckering another school or media outlet to hire him.
It's been interesting - and impressive - to see what Lance Leipold has going at Kansas. In the recent past Kansas-to-UCLA would have been a jump of about six levels of competition...but Leipold is actually building a program, as he's done at each of his past stops, and Kelly is just treading water. This is simply a thought exercise, as I've never truly contemplated the change so far, but I'm with you on the concept of not shooting for a big name for our next coach. Washington has done pretty well with the Fresno State coach that beat #13 UCLA a couple of years ago.
UCLA won't be "flushed (sic) with Big Ten cash" until we actually join the Big Ten and that doesn't happen until August 1, 2024.
I will have to obtain his contract to see what the exact date the buyout drops will be, but if it's December 1, then firing Kelly before then would make no sense at all. It would be just throwing about $4M away.
Wonder how much they've thrown away on this "program" since Kelly was hired? My guess is way more than $4m. You are suggesting giving him another full season (possibly into 2024), I wouldn't give him another full game!